|
Post by cityofchamps on Jul 31, 2015 21:35:03 GMT -5
Doesn't matter. Having Brady's phone would have made all the difference in the investigation. The fact that he destroyed it (after he knew they wanted information from it might I add) would have made it harder for the NFL to find the information. Tell me, which would be easier? Searching through a phone manually, or having to search ion trails to find the information that was in the phone? The fact remains that Tom Brady didn't tell them he destroyed it until after the investigation was over. They didn't know that information was available in that fashion and Brady was still refusing to give up that information. Giving it up when he did would have only lengthened the appeal process, which could have potentially allowed him to play Week 1 and beyond without an injunction. You can buy all of Tom Brady's excuses that you want, but it won't be enough to get the suspension wiped out. Again, if Tom Brady was completely innocent, he could have had this thing over and done with months ago if he had just handed over his phone when the investigation asked for it in the first place. Why didn't he allow the NFL to search his message history before the investigation was over? Why did he keep refusing to give up information until after the investigation and appeal? It doesn't matter if he was switching phones and he "habitually" destroys the old ones. That habit had to have been broken for the investigation, if only to preserve his "innocence". Brady has not acted like an innocent man. He has acted like a man desperately trying to find a loophole out of this without the actual truth coming out.
1. That is because other players cooperate with the NFL. It is in the CBA that the NFL has the right to discipline players for not cooperating with an investigation.
2. It is more than an simple equipment violation. This is an integrity issue. 3. The NFL has the right to request it. They are entitled to that. They just don't have the power to forcefully obtain information. Any investigations by the NFL into its players relies completely on cooperation between both parties. If a player refuses to cooperate, the NFL has sufficient reason to believe that they aren't telling the truth or they aren't innocent. Tom Brady refused to give up his phone due to an invasion of his privacy, but you can search key words within conversations to find things that are relevant to the investigation. If there isn't anything, Tom Brady had nothing to fear. You sound like all my teachers. You can "tell" when someone is guilty. Who cares if Brady hasn't acted like an innocent man?!?! If I skip an optional drug test, am I on drugs? If this is about "integrity" then aren't ALL equipment violations about integrity? When Clay Matthews wore the wrong color shoes, why wasn't he suspended? Because wearing different colored shoes isn't an attempt to gain an unfair advantage over the competition. Also, Tom Brady's phone was highly relevant to the investigation. McNally and Jastremski mentioned receiving personal gifts such as money, shoes, and autographed merchandise from Brady for doing this work. If there were conversations regarding giving such items to the two employees, then that is more than circumstantial evidence. He had the right to refuse giving up his phone, but doing so (and destroying the phone, refusing to give up the information until after the appeal) made him look like he is hiding something.
|
|
|
Post by Morkim on Jul 31, 2015 21:37:00 GMT -5
Lol I have never defended a Patriots players criminal actions before. I did not defend Alfonzo Dennard after his DUI nor Hernandez after his murder. Belichick has never tripped a player, only two NFL coaches have ever done that... None of my players are rapists so that isnt even comparable. You are the same person who thinks "Goodell destroyed the tapes", but then goes ahead and doesnt mind the way this case is being handled. lol your double standards are laughable. I am bias yes, but you cant come up with one double standard that would also apply to your team... Bullcrap. You defended Hernandez up to the moment his conviction came out. Weren't you the one saying there wasn't enough to proclaim him guilty? That he was going to be announced innocent? Don't give me that crap. You were all about standing up for Hernandez all throughout the trial process. Ben isn't a rapist either. He is just an accused rapist. There is a difference. Just because there was a "Settlement" in the case doesn't mean he is automatically guilty. If you think the settlement is the thing that makes Ben a rapist, then if Tom Brady is suspended for any amount of games in 2015, then you have to proclaim him guilty of cheating. Otherwise, that is a clear double standard. Also, Mike Tomlin never "tripped" Jacoby Jones (please correct your misinformation). He jumped out of the way which may or may not have slowed Jones down. He was eventually tackled by the Defense. Mike Tomlin made no contact whatsoever with Jacoby Jones. Look at the video. I lulz'd at the Tomlin defense a little. But you're not wrong. All he did was alter the path of the runner and potentially change a game changing play. Who knows. You're also prob twisting words a little. Don't think skid said Hernandez would be proclaimed innocent. Just that he wouldn't be guilty. There's a difference. But maybe I'm misremembering what he said. Again, who knows.
|
|
|
Post by patriotsk1d on Jul 31, 2015 22:12:44 GMT -5
Lol I have never defended a Patriots players criminal actions before. I did not defend Alfonzo Dennard after his DUI nor Hernandez after his murder. Belichick has never tripped a player, only two NFL coaches have ever done that... None of my players are rapists so that isnt even comparable. You are the same person who thinks "Goodell destroyed the tapes", but then goes ahead and doesnt mind the way this case is being handled. lol your double standards are laughable. I am bias yes, but you cant come up with one double standard that would also apply to your team... Bullcrap. You defended Hernandez up to the moment his conviction came out. Weren't you the one saying there wasn't enough to proclaim him guilty? That he was going to be announced innocent? Don't give me that crap. You were all about standing up for Hernandez all throughout the trial process. Ben isn't a rapist either. He is just an accused rapist. There is a difference. Just because there was a "Settlement" in the case doesn't mean he is automatically guilty. If you think the settlement is the thing that makes Ben a rapist, then if Tom Brady is suspended for any amount of games in 2015, then you have to proclaim him guilty of cheating. Otherwise, that is a clear double standard. Also, Mike Tomlin never "tripped" Jacoby Jones (please correct your misinformation). He jumped out of the way which may or may not have slowed Jones down. He was eventually tackled by the Defense. Mike Tomlin made no contact whatsoever with Jacoby Jones. Look at the video.[/quote Nope I said I thought Hernandez would walk, claimed it was unlikely he would be found guilty only because of the legal process. Never once defended him or claimed his innocence. The entire Hernandez thing is archived on this site, find one quote which I actually defended the guy after his arrest. Ok got it so Ben settled so he is innocent. Brady didnt provide his cell phone and he is guilty. I have watched the video hundreds of time. Tomlin tripped him, only Steelers fans think otherwise. NFL found him guilty, so he was guilty. You are still gasping at straws...
|
|
|
Post by patriotsk1d on Jul 31, 2015 22:14:07 GMT -5
You sound like all my teachers. You can "tell" when someone is guilty. Who cares if Brady hasn't acted like an innocent man?!?! If I skip an optional drug test, am I on drugs? If this is about "integrity" then aren't ALL equipment violations about integrity? When Clay Matthews wore the wrong color shoes, why wasn't he suspended? Because wearing different colored shoes isn't an attempt to gain an unfair advantage over the competition. Also, Tom Brady's phone was highly relevant to the investigation. McNally and Jastremski mentioned receiving personal gifts such as money, shoes, and autographed merchandise from Brady for doing this work. If there were conversations regarding giving such items to the two employees, then that is more than circumstantial evidence. He had the right to refuse giving up his phone, but doing so (and destroying the phone, refusing to give up the information until after the appeal) made him look like he is hiding something. Ted Wells never wanted his phone, just the records. Brady offered to provide those records, NFL refused. How does that go over your head? Should I post it like 100 more times and maybe you will process it?
|
|
|
Post by Juggs on Jul 31, 2015 22:37:07 GMT -5
Settlements in rape cases aren't the same as settlements in civil court. Ben paid her off. The rest the world knows it. Jameis and hardy did too. The league and Brady aren't reaching a financial settlement to get out of a career ending rape trial. We don't know for sure that Ben would have been found guilty, but there's no reason to think he isn't guilty in reality.
|
|
|
Post by Juggs on Jul 31, 2015 22:39:00 GMT -5
Because wearing different colored shoes isn't an attempt to gain an unfair advantage over the competition. Also, Tom Brady's phone was highly relevant to the investigation. McNally and Jastremski mentioned receiving personal gifts such as money, shoes, and autographed merchandise from Brady for doing this work. If there were conversations regarding giving such items to the two employees, then that is more than circumstantial evidence. He had the right to refuse giving up his phone, but doing so (and destroying the phone, refusing to give up the information until after the appeal) made him look like he is hiding something. Ted Wells never wanted his phone, just the records. Brady offered to provide those records, NFL refused. How does that go over your head? Should I post it like 100 more times and maybe you will process it? Just keep repeating it it won't get less poorly thought out. The burden was on Brady to provide evidence to his own defense, not the league to sift through 10000 dick pics to Giselle.
|
|
|
Post by Juggs on Jul 31, 2015 22:45:54 GMT -5
As much as I am pro affirmative action, especially for exclusive, role model jobs like being an Nfl HC, Tomlin got off because he is a black head coach. Goodell can't afford to lose one or punish one because of the sickening preferance for white coaches in the NFL. Goodell was basically forced to let him off and it is unfortunate. Tomlin has no business having a job in the NFL, neither does Bell, Blount, Hardy, Winston, or AP.
|
|
|
Post by patriotsk1d on Jul 31, 2015 22:45:44 GMT -5
Ted Wells never wanted his phone, just the records. Brady offered to provide those records, NFL refused. How does that go over your head? Should I post it like 100 more times and maybe you will process it? Just keep repeating it it won't get less poorly thought out. The burden was on Brady to provide evidence to his own defense, not the league to sift through 10000 dick pics to Giselle. No but the phone is completely irreverent since the NFL had no right to that information anyways, yet it was the top headline yesterday and COC is basing his entire argument off of it.
|
|
|
Post by patriotsk1d on Jul 31, 2015 22:46:47 GMT -5
As much as I am pro affirmative action, especially for exclusive, role model jobs like being an Nfl HC, Tomlin got off because he is a black head coach. Goodell can't afford to lose one or punish one because of the sickening preferance for white coaches in the NFL. Goodell was basically forced to let him off and it is unfortunate. Tomlin has no business having a job in the NFL, neither does Bell, Blount, Hardy, Winston, or AP. What has Blount done that he deserves to be kicked off the league for?
|
|
|
Post by Juggs on Jul 31, 2015 22:53:02 GMT -5
As much as I am pro affirmative action, especially for exclusive, role model jobs like being an Nfl HC, Tomlin got off because he is a black head coach. Goodell can't afford to lose one or punish one because of the sickening preferance for white coaches in the NFL. Goodell was basically forced to let him off and it is unfortunate. Tomlin has no business having a job in the NFL, neither does Bell, Blount, Hardy, Winston, or AP. What has Blount done that he deserves to be kicked off the league for? Driving under the influence, but I didn't say kicked out like permanently... How about the two different times he's punched players in the face on a football field. I remember because he was wearing a titans uniform before he played for your team lol. Edit: turns out he never got a DUI . my bad. Espn and the like reported it so poorly I remember it that way.
|
|